iPhone could have been named “Telepod,” “Mobi,” “Tripod,” or even “iPad”

More product name trivia from Apple's former creative director Ken Segall.

Apple cofounder Steve Jobs had many strengths, but that doesn't mean he was immune to bad ideas. Former ad agency creative director Ken Segall revealed some of Jobs' crazier ideas in his book Insanely Simplein May of last year. At that time, he discussed with Ars Jobs' original desire to name the iMac "the MacMan" and a launch plan that involved Jobs dressing up as Willy Wonka.

Now, Segall has come out with even more zany names that Apple considered for its products. During a talk at the University of Arizona's Department of Marketing, Segall said Apple considered names like "Telepod," "Mobi," "Tripod," and even "iPad" for what was ultimately called the "iPhone."

9to5Mac's Scott Buscemi was at the talk and gathered some details about why Apple was leaning toward some of these options: Apple apparently considered "Telepod" because the word mixed "telephone" with "pod," the latter of which was a play on Apple's iPod line. "Mobi" was simply a shortened version of "mobile," but the name that seemed to resonate most with Apple during the early stages was "Tripod."

"While this name did not win out, it did make a big impact on Apple’s original presentation and marketing for the iPhone. 'Tripod' stems from the iPhone being a combination phone + iPod + internet communications device," 9to5Mac wrote of Segall's talk. "Indeed, Apple heavily marketed the original iPhone as such. As we know today, with the App Store and other new Apple apps, the iPhone platform is so much more than just a phone, internet communicator, and media player."

So what was with the "iPad" consideration for the product that became the iPhone? It seems there's no direct explanation for this, except that Apple had been working on a tablet before it shifted priorities to a smartphone (which was ultimately launched first). From this perspective, Apple was likely considering other names for what is now known as the iPad and thought "iPad" would fit better for its smaller, handheld twin.

I still don't think any of those names are as bad as "Zune." I remember just thinking when it came out that it was a terrible awkward sounding name. And the real tragedy is that once you pick the name, you're pretty much stuck with it forever with future iterations.

But I guess we're arguing apples and oranges when talking about devices that are essentially hard drives with touch interfaces.

No matter how bad the name of the device was the army of apple zealots that helped make the original iphone a success when it debuted would have bought it

Do people really,truly believe stuff like this, or has responding this way just become a reactionary habit whenever Apple is mentioned?

There's an element of truth to it, in that early adopters of a thing do tend to be fans of the company's other products, and these people play a large part in advertising via word-of-mouth, but the thing also needs to be an actual good product, something non-fans want to use too.

There are, quite literally, some people who would buy cow patty Popsicles from Apple if they were offered up for dessert.

There are also, quite literally, some people who will concoct any manner of nonsensical scenarios in order to deal with the cognative dissonance they experience at the thought of other people holding a different opinion to themselves.

In June 2010, Apple rebranded iPhone OS as "iOS". The trademark "IOS" had been used by Cisco for over a decade for its operating system, IOS, used on its routers. To avoid any potential lawsuit, Apple licensed the "IOS" trademark from Cisco.

Good grief, is this what we've moved on to now? The trolls have finally admitted that Apple did, in fact, pay for access to Xerox's ideas, so we're reduced to snide allusions that Apple only paid them after the fact?

Good grief, is this what we've moved on to now? The trolls have finally admitted that Apple did, in fact, pay for access to Xerox's ideas, so we're reduced to snide allusions that Apple only paid them after the fact?

How about you cite your source for that little gem?

(edited for clarity and grammar)

Ummm, thats what I got from the movie.Other than that source I admittedly know little about Apple's early years as I have little interest in the company.

Does anyone really believe these stories? There's a huge difference between brainstorming a variety of wacky names, and actually deciding on a name like "Tripod" and moving forward with that name until the denizens of the Internet convinced Apple they should, in fact, call it the iPhone.

If the product is good enough (or even acceptable) to the masses, the name won't be a big deal.

Kindle, Asus, Oakley...names aren't that important IMHO.

I keep banging this drum especially with regards to the terrible "iWatch" moniker but this is a good example of how a name can severely skew how one conceptualizes a product.

Apple really did see the original iPhone as merely a "combination phone + iPod + internet communications device" (albeit very well designed one) and the name TriPod would have codified that perspective. If from the get go they had went beyond that narrative not only would the name "TriPod"made no sense, they could have easily leap frogged much more quickly how the iPhone evolved.

If the product is good enough (or even acceptable) to the masses, the name won't be a big deal.

Well if you'd have to wield something that's called an iRing-a-DingPod or so, some of us might think twice before buying it...

No matter how bad the name of the device was the army of apple zealots that helped make the original iphone a success when it debuted would have bought it, and it probably would have ended up a success with some abbreviated name.

There are, quite literally, some people who would buy cow patty Popsicles from Apple if they were offered up for dessert.

Why? What was the point? Does it fill a void in your life? I mean, lets counter. Every. Single. Apple. Post. Up you pop with a mindless troll. Grow up.

Has Ars done any articles on trolling lately? They've got all this data right here! It's amazing how such an innocuous article can generate so much hate. Maybe YouTube's comment servers are down, so everyones comming here.

Asus and Oakley are the names of the companies, and I quite like the name Kindle. It means inspirational and evokes feelings of sitting by a fireplace reading your favorite book. B&N did the same thing with Nook.

I, for one, think that Mobi would have been a brilliant choice. Do you have a Mobi? Much of the world refers to cell phone as mobiles. It wasn't in the Ars post, but on another site I saw that Mobi was considered as it had personality. And indeed it does.

iPhone is rather boring, but in hindsight, it did lead to cross marketing of a family of products. But the lower case "i" is corny, like McDonald's marketing of McProducts. Also in hindsight, the iPhone was such a fantastic product that it would have succeeded with a truly horrible name.

If Apple had called the iPhone "Mobi" it would have been in a world of hurt. Not only has Mobi been used in the mobile world for about 13 years, but Amazon became a heavy-weight behind the technology before the iPhone was released. And it would have been conducive for Apple to try to block Amazon from its app store until it sold the naming rights to Apple, it would have put Apple's anti-competitive practices front-and-center during the iPhone's heyday. And I know people will argue that Apple is still in its heyday, but there is no arguing that the iPhone was much more popular in 2007 than it is today.

No matter how bad the name of the device was the army of apple zealots that helped make the original iphone a success when it debuted would have bought it

Do people really,truly believe stuff like this, or has responding this way just become a reactionary habit whenever Apple is mentioned?

Define "people." If you mean those of us who have listened to Apple fans blather on about the magical prowess of their devices the way BMW owners used to compare notes in the '80s, then the answer to your question is yes.

If the product is good enough (or even acceptable) to the masses, the name won't be a big deal.

Well if you'd have to wield something that's called an iRing-a-DingPod or so, some of us might think twice before buying it...

No matter how bad the name of the device was the army of apple zealots that helped make the original iphone a success when it debuted would have bought it, and it probably would have ended up a success with some abbreviated name.

There are, quite literally, some people who would buy cow patty Popsicles from Apple if they were offered up for dessert.

Why? What was the point? Does it fill a void in your life? I mean, lets counter. Every. Single. Apple. Post. Up you pop with a mindless troll. Grow up.

Because emphasizing your point by separating words with periods is the picture of grown up.